Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.apz.19920519A G E N D A ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING May 19, 1992, Tuesday 4:30 P.M. 2nd Floor Meeting Room City Hall ----------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------- I. COMMENTS Commissioners Planning Staff Public II. MINUTES III. NEW BUSINESS A. Caribou Club Cafe Special Review for Use of Open Space, Kim Johnson B. Crestahaus Lodge GMQS Exemption for an Affordable Housing Triplex, Kim Johnson C. Text Amendment for Parking in the office (0) Zone one District, Leslie Lamont IV. ADJOURN MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Cindy Christensen, Planning Office RE: Upcoming Meetings DATE: May 14, 1992 This is a list of your scheduled upcoming meetings. Regular Meeting, June 2nd * Aspen Savings & Loan Conditional Use (PH) (KJ) * Pitkin County Library Special Review for Parking,(LL) Regular Meeting, June 16th a.nex 91 MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Diane Moore and Leslie Lamont DATE: May 19, 1992 RE: Office Zone District Text Amendments SUMMARY: The Commission recommended to City Council several text amendments regarding the parking requirements in the Office Zone District, Special Review for parking mitigation and Change in Use clarification. Although Council approved the Ordinance on First Reading, Council directed staff to revise the proposed amendments and to return to the Commission for more direction regarding "mitigation alternatives". Staff would like to review the revised text with the Commission and discuss mitigation alternatives other than cash -in -lieu before returning to Council for second reading of the Ordinance. PROPOSED AMENDMENTS: The text amendments have been revised since the Commission adopted the proposal at their March 31, 1992 meeting. Council. and staff have revised the proposal in the following manner: 1) To keep the standard for parking in the Office zone District at 3 spaces/1,000 square feet. 2 ) To allow for the Planning and Zoning Commission to accept the following mitigation for parking: a. on -site parking b. off -site C. cash -in -lieu d. alternative mitigation 3) Provide the ability to reduce parking on -site below 1.5 spaces/1,000 sq.' ft. but require mitigation for any reductions below 3 spaces/1,000 sq. ft. 4) Eliminate the Special Review by Council to reduce or waive parking requirements and/or mitigation. 3/ 5) The amendments to the change in use section have been eliminated but will be considered in the future when a more comprehensive discussion can occur. The proposed amendments will enable the Planning and Zoning Commission to reduce the on -site parking requirements in the Office zone district through parking mitigation criteria outlined in the Special Review section of the Land Use Code. This is similar to the parking requirements of the CC and C-1 zone districts where on - site parking may be reduced with a payment -in -lieu to the Parking Fund. The proposed language is as follows: E. Off-street parking requirement. 3. All other uses: 3 spaces/1,000 sq. ft. of net leasable area; these spaces may be mitigated via a payment in lieu or other forms of mitigation that is approved by the Commission by special review pursuant to Article 7, Division 4. A reduction in parking from the standard 3 spaces/ 1, 000 square feet of net leasable as required in the Office zone district will still require mitigation. Currently, parking mitigation is $15,000 per parking space. However, the amendments to the Special Review section of the Land Use Code provide the ability for an applicant to mitigate on -site parking by a means other than cash -in -lieu. The Special Review section of the Land Use Code has been amended to include the following mitigation measures: * availability of sufficient publicly owned parking spaces in the area * availability of shared or adjacent off -site parking * applicant's commitment to support alternative transportation modes * public health, safety and welfare POINT OF DISCUSSION: Council approved first reading of Ordinance 35 proposing the text amendments on May 11, 1992. Council is still concerned by the lack of specificity with regard to "alternative mitigation" for a reduction in on -site parking. The Council would like the Commission to consider alternative mitigation measures that are tangible and enforceable. These measures would be alternatives that the Commission could accept in lieu of.on-site parking. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Commission identify additional parking mitigation other than cash -in -lieu for recommendation to Council. 2 3z Affordable housing is listed as a permitted use in the LP zone. The proposed triplex complies with the dimensional requirements of the LP zone. According to the Land Use Code, parking for residential use is N/A (not applicable) in the LP district. There are 47 parking spaces on -site. The applicant states that no additional parking is necessary for three reasons: the current management lives on -site and is provided with Crestahaus vehicles for transportation; for the most part the other employees use RFTA; and most lodge guests rely on the Crestahaus shuttle or RFTA, so the parking lot is seldom full. Staff believes that there will be little parking impact based on this information. There is no street parking available on Hwy.82 in front of the lodge, so the applicant is committed to keeping employees on mass transit or in Crestahaus vehicles. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the GMQS Exemption for the affordable housing tri-plex to be voluntarily constructed at the Crestahaus Lodge with the following conditions: 1. The owner shall submit appropriate deed restrictions to the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority for approval. The units shall be deed restricted to Resident Occupancy with minimum 6 month leases. The deed restriction shall include a mandatory occupancy requirement with a maximum vacancy period of 30 days. Upon approval by the Housing Authority, the Owner shall record the deed restrictions with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder's Office. 2. Prior to issuance of any building permits for the property, a copy of the recorded deed restrictions for the accessory dwelling units must be forwarded to the Planning Office. 3. Unit C shall be configured and deed restricted as a separate living unit. The entry/mudroom shall be common space for Units A and C. The locking door for Unit A shall be located at the bottom or top of the stairway. 4. Prior to the issuance of any building permit, a site drainage plan for the triplex showing that the storm drainage system can be adequately incorporated into the existing system must be submitted to and approved by the City Engineering Department. The drainage plan must be prepared by an engineer registered in the State of Colorado. 5. All material representations made by the applicant in the application and during public meetings with the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council shall be adhered to and considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by other conditions. RECOMMENDED MOTION: I move to approve GMQS Exemption for three affordable housing units restricted to Resident Occupancy (with 3 mandatory occupancy) to be voluntarily constructed at the Crestahaus Lodge with the five conditions recommended in the Planning Office memo dated 5/19/92. Exhibits: "A" - Proposed Site Plan, Floorplans, Elevations, and Application Letter "B" - Referral Memos 4 MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Kim Johnson, Planning RE: Crestahaus Lodge - GMQS Exemption for an Affordable Housing Tri-plex DATE: May 19, 1992 SUMMARY: The applicant seeks to construct a tri-plex restricted to Resident Occupancy on the Crestahaus Lodge property. This is a GMQS exemption by Council with review and recommendation from the Commission. Staff recommends approval of the GMQS Exemption with conditions. APPLICANT: Melinda Goldrich, represented by Susan Furr LOCATION: 1301 E. Cooper, a 1.23 acre metes and bounds parcel ZONING: (LP) Lodge Preservation APPLICANT'S REQUEST: The applicant seeks GMQS Exemption for the construction of a tri-plex on the west side of the lodge parcel. The structure will be 2,700 s.f. The first level will contain two studio units of 500 s.f. and 600 s.f. It is anticipated that these units will be occupied by a manager and another employee of the lodge. In the event that these were not occupied by lodge employees, Resident Occupancy deed restriction would allow them to be rented to other employees of the community. The second level will be a 1,600 s.f. one bedroom unit as the residence for the applicant. Please see Exhibit "A" for site plan, elevations, and floor plans of the lodge and proposed tri-plex. REFERRAL COMMENTS: For complete referral memos, please see Exhibit- "$" Engineering: A site drainage plan for the triplex showing that the storm drainage system can be adequately incorporated into the existing system must be submitted to and approved by the City Engineering Department prior to the issuance of any building permit. The drainage plan must be prepared by an engineer registered in the State of Colorado. Housing Authority: Dave Tolen submitted the following comments: All of the units must be deed restricted for Resident Occupancy (9 months per year residency applicable to operator/managers, minimum six month leases required for seasonal workers) . The spaces cannot be used for any other use, ie. storage or guest accommodations. There is concern that these units may remain vacant. As approved through the incentive of GMQS Exemption, they should be restricted i3 to mandatory occupancy for tenants verified through the Housing Authority. In further conversations with Jim Curtis of the Housing Authority Board, it was determined that this condition be augmented to include a 30 or 45 day maximum vacancy period STAFF COMMENTS: Pursuant to Section 8-104 C.1(c) the Council shall exempt deed restricted housing that is provided in accordance with the housing guidelines. However the Commission shall review and make a recommendation to Council regarding the housing package. According to the Code, the review of any request for exemption of housing pursuant to this section shall include a determination of the City's need for such housing, considering the proposed development's compliance with an adopted housing plan, the number of dwelling units proposed and their location, the type of dwelling units proposed, specifically regarding the number of bedrooms in each unit, the size of the dwelling unit, the rental/sale mix of the proposed development, and the proposed price categories to which the dwelling units are to be deed restricted. RESPONSE: The Crestahaus Lodge has 30 guest rooms and a three bedroom employee house on the property. The existing employee unit houses 3-5 persons during the season. An additional unit on the property houses the resident manager. More employee housing is needed according to the application. Currently the owner -operator lives off -premise during high season in order not to occupy a guest room. The applicant is voluntarily proposing to construct a 2,700 s.f. triplex for use by herself as owner/manager and other lodge employees. The application shows that Unit C may be joined to the 1,600 s. f . second level Unit A through the common entryway to allow for a family management situation. The proposed deed restriction is Resident Occupancy which allows bona fide employed residents of the community to rent the units with six month minimum leases. Specifically, the application requests no mandatory occupancy requirements are placed on the units. As pointed out in Dave Tolen's comments from the Housing Authority, the units should have mandatory occupancy requirements to ensure that these units do not remain vacant or are used for non-residential purposes. Planning staff agrees with the Housing Authority requirements for mandatory occupancy of the units. The Growth Management Exemptions granted for these type of affordable units are valuable exemptions to Growth Management competition and it should be expected that every reasonable protection of these units as employee housing should be incorporated in to their approval. In response to the applicant's proposal that Unit C can be utilized by Unit A for more living space, staff argues that Unit C cannot become part of Unit A without the removal of the kitchen. Therefore, the entry to Units A and C must remain common area, with the locking door to Unit A being located at the bottom of the stairs or at the top of the stairs. 61 14 TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Kim Johnson, Planning RE: Caribou Club Cafe Special Review for Use of Open Space DATE: May 19, 1992 SUMMARY: The Caribou Club seeks Special Review approval to establish outdoor dining in the required open space area in the courtyard of Collins Alley. The Planning Office recommends approval of the outdoor dining with conditions. APPLICANT: Caribou Club, Harley Baldwin LOCATION: 411 E. Hopkins Avenue, Aspen ZONING: CC - Commercial Core APPLICANT'S REQUEST: To place 12 tables and 34 seats in required open space in the courtyard oe-Collins Al1e Please refer to Exhibit "A" for site plan and sketches of the proposed tables and fencing. REFERRAL COMMENTS: Please refer to Exhibit "B" for complete memos. Fire Marshal: Wayne VandeMark comments that this proposal meets the required 44" emergency egress requirements of the Building Code. The walkways must remain clear of obstructions. Environmental Health: There are no problems with the proposed dining use provided that no food is prepared outside. Historic Preservation Committee: Because the proposal is in the Historic Commercial Core Historic District the HPC has reviewed the application and approved the outdoor seating and fencing proposal with no conditions with the understanding that the seating/fencing was for summer use only. STAFF COMMENTS: Pursuant to Section 3-301, required open space may be used for commercial restaurant use if the commission determines that such use is compatible with or enhances the purposes of these open space requirements and that adequate pedestrian and emergency vehicle access will be maintained. Response: The applicant proposes to place 12 small umbrella tables and 34 seats in the courtyard -like area known as Collins Ailey. Short sections of wrought iron fencing will be used to encompass pairs of tables and help separate them from the bulk of pedestrian circulation. We As the Fire Marshal states that this proposal will not violate minimum required 44" pedestrian or emergency access requirements, Planning supports the physical layout of the seating. However, staff is concerned that the general public will be excluded from enjoying the seats/dining. The application states that the proposed dining will be similar to the Aspen Grove, Pour La France, and The Cantina. However, these businesses have no membership requirements. If the seating can only be occupied by Caribou Club members, roughly 40% of this small open space is not accessible to public use. Planning recommends that if this required open space is used for dining, walk-up public must be served. In this manner the proposed use will be compatible with, and enhance the open space. The applicant is reminded that any outdoor signs, including advertising on the umbrellas are subject to the City's sign regulations. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval Special Review for dining in Collins Alley (12 umbrella tables, 34 chairs) with the following conditions: 1. The outdoor dining shall be open to walk-up public uses,} 2. The required 44" walkways must remain free of any obstructions. 3. The use outdoor seating/dining shall occur only from May through em-"5e"r,.15. 4. Compliance with all City sign regulations is required. 5. All material representations made by the applicant in the application and during public meetings with the Planning and Zoning Commission shall be adhered to and considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by other conditions. RECOMMENDED MOTION: I move to approve Special Review for outdoor dining (12 umbrella tables, 34 chairs) in the required open space of Collins Alley with the five conditions recommended in the Planning Office memo dated 5/19/92. Exhibits: "A" - Proposed table/seating arrangement "B" - Referral comments 0